Star Ruby and Hexagram Rituals

[Fr. A.U.N.]

If the Star Ruby is used as a banishing ritual, what kind of hexagram is to be used to banish the planets? Star Ruby uses the N.O.X. formula, and classical hexagrams use the L.V.X. and in some way I find it not quite ok to mix it. Am I wrong? Also, the Star Sapphire is inpractical for the purpose, since it is clearly much more than banishing ritual (if it is banishing hexagram at all).
I'd like your opinnions on the matter, Jim's especially?

[Jim Eshelman]

If the Star Ruby is used as a banishing ritual, what kind of hexagram is to be used to banish the planets?

The Star Ruby is considered an omniform banishing ritual - it clears at every level. A separate Hexagram Ritual isn't usually deemed necessary as a generic preliminary.

OTOH if one invokes planetary forces, then one generally banishes them by the same formula used to invoke them.

Star Ruby uses the N.O.X. formula, and classical hexagrams use the L.V.X. and in some way I find it not quite ok to mix it. Am I wrong?

It's not quite that simple. For example, Star Ruby uses the N.O.X. signs but not a full N.O.X. formula - no "analysis of the keyword," for example, just a brief giving of the signs. I have at least a brief "cringe" of this mixing in some situations, similar to the instinct you're reporting, and there are several ways to approach it.

One way - the way I use most often - is that I don't banish by the Star Ruby. For most purposes, I far prefer the classic Lesser Ritual of the Pentagram. This circumvents the problem you cited with what I believe is a better ritual in general.

Another way is to use a Hexagram Ritual with a matching formula. We have one that I'm not at liberty to publish (a full N.O.X. formulation complete with Analysis of the Key Word that T.'.O.'.T.'. 7° are taught). You may be able to contribe a similar formula on your own.

Another way is just to say "screw it" and put together whatever you like <<vbg>.

Also, the Star Sapphire is inpractical for the purpose, since it is clearly much more than banishing ritual (if it is banishing hexagram at all).

Yes, it's an invoking ritual and, in the best use I think, is a generic rather than specific formula. (It's way bigger than the usual kind of Hexagram ritual, as you discerned.)

[Fr. A.U.N.]

Thank you for your insight, Jim.

[Fr. A.U.N.]

Could anyone post the full N.O.X. formula with the analysis of the keyword?

[Jim Eshelman]

Could anyone post the full N.O.X. formula with the analysis of the keyword?

The signs are public, and the matching of the letters to the signs is given in an endnote in the current Book 4 editon; but the Analysis of the Keyword combined with the N.O.X. signs is obligated.

[Jim Eshelman]

Having said 'No' above, it occurred to me that the following might be useful. It's an excerpt from the Appendix of 776 1/2, concerning the "Analysis of the Key Word" from the Lesser Ritual of the Hexagram:

Because this formulation is based on the exact “resurrection” myth of Osiris that Thelema rejects (considering it outdated), most Thelemic magicians reject this formula. This creates a problem for which there are various solutions.

First, we should place the original Analysis in its historic and magical context. In the original Golden Dawn, a member would first hear this Analysis in the moments after the dramatic and magical climax of his or her initiation into the 5=6 (Adeptus Minor) grade. In most cases, there would be no realistic way to separate the Analysis from the sense memory of this precious moment. Thereafter, anytime the Adept performed the Hexagram Ritual, there would be some measure of return to that exact moment in time and its chrism.

This effect was lost when the Hexagram Ritual was published in 1909 and people began performing it at an early stage. (Of course, if they were never going to pass through a Golden Dawn type of initiatory system, then nothing was lost.)

Temple of Thelema does not use the above form of the ritual. The main reason is that it does not conform to the underlying myth, or archetypal pattern, on which our work is based. But a secondary advantage is that we have recovered the effect just mentioned. A member first hears our formulation of the Analysis of the Key Word just moments after the dramatic and magical climax of their 5° (Adeptus) initiation. For this reason – to preserve an aspirant’s “virginity” at a precious, beatific moment – we do not disclose it publically.

However, this demonstrates one solution for those who do not resonate to the Osirian “slain-and-risen” formula given above: Write a new one.

Another solution is to use the Qabalistic Cross instead of the Analysis of the Key Word. The Qabalistic Cross was given previously as the opening and closing parts of the Lesser Ritual of the Pentagram. It is entirely efficacious for the basic magical purposes of the Hexagram Ritual. In fact, we have recommended it for those occasions when a First Order member (someone not yet admitted to our Second Order formula) needs to perform the Hexagram Ritual for some purpose.

In fact, the Qabalistic Cross was an important part of the original form of the Hexagram Ritual as taught by the founders of the Golden Dawn. The original form was not symmetrical like the Pentagram Ritual. That is, it did not use the same forms for its beginning and ending. Instead, as first taught, the Hexagram Ritual was as follows:

1. Qabalistic Cross
2. Draw and charge the Hexagrams [...]
3. Analysis of the Key Word

This ritual pattern produces a very different effect! Rather than attempt to describe the difference, we leave it to the magician to experiment.

A further approach, for those who generally reject the above Osiris formula as outdated, is to use this traditional formula anyway. It still articulates a particular stage of individual evolution, and therefore can be useful. Its dramatic presentation of sequential psychological states of death (or resignation), grief, rage, and acceptance (or release) can be especially effective during times of change or transition.

[Fr. A.U.N.]

Thanks again, Jim.